Why You Cannot Make a Living in Casinos
DGRANT
beady little eyes. The hourly rake can sometimes be much worse than the percentage rake! It
depends upon the action and the type of game. Stop the bullshit Luzzi. You are making my
bullshit detector wail at a high scream! Of all the nonsensical, mathematically incorrect hyperbolic
posts I read on this newsgroup, your posts are right up there with the most unbelievable.
understand, the following two x-two-sigma standard deviation chart represents a 5% house-rake chart.
This chart shows what will happen to a player playing against a 5% house rake or advantage
based upon even money payoffs. It is a very simple chart as it deals only with even money
payoffs and a standard house rake percentage of five percent. It shows what a player’s money
position will be on average, and
best possible position (very lucky) and worst possible position (very
unlucky) as the game
processes.
Further note the amounts indicated in this chart are cumulative. The
casino or table does not know that you left the table. Blackjack and Poker are never-ending
giant games that go on for as long as you play them. Contrary to popular opinion (and especially
contrary to what Ray DeGennaro A.K.A. Rubin et al aliases said about Poker) you cannot
“fool” the math by simply leaving the game and then returning another day. Blackjack and Poker
percentages are “cumulative.” Do not forget that very important fact. Moreover, the
following chart does not have anything to do with the other players. It simply shows you what
will happen to your money, dollar by dollar, as it is placed on a poker table against a 5% house
rake.
Cumulative on Table
Dollars You Wager. Best Position: Worst Position:
Average Position:
$250 +$19.12 Units. -$44.12
-$12.50 Units.
$500 +$19.72 Units. -$69.72
-$25.00 Units.
$1000 +$13.25 Units. –$113.24
-$50.00 Units.
$5,000 -$109.00 Units. -$391.42
-$250.00 Units.
$10,000 -$300.00 Units. -$700.00
-$500.00 Units.
$15,000 -$505.05 Units. -$995.00
-$750.00 Units.
$40,000 -$1600.00 Units. -$2400.00
-$2000.00 Units.
$50,000 -$2053.00 Units. -$2947.00
-$2500,00 Units.
$60,000 -$2510.00 Units. -$3490.00
-$3000.00 Units.
$100,000 -$4368.00 Units. -$5632.00
-$5000.00 Units.
$200,000 -$9105.00 Units. -$10894.00
-$10000.00 Units
This chart is extremely accurate (that is why I used 2x2 Sigma) and
revealing. Now you know why casinos’ make so much money. And now you know why I say an expert
poker player cannot overcome the typical house rake. I initially said they could not
overcome a 10% house rake, but I thought I would show you exactly how bad even **half** that amount
will be if the poker player is stupid enough to keep playing.
The poker boys (most are working for the house that posts here) like
to claim that a good poker player has an advantage over a bad poker player. That is no doubt
true, but such an ambiguous statement cannot be completely and mathematically defined. When my
Blackjack schools were open, we were looking for another casino game course to teach other
than card counting. We had tens of thousands of students interested in playing poker, so we
commissioned a computer program to be written to simulate how much of an advantage a “perfect”
poker player would gain over a “typical” poker player. The results were not very encouraging.
(I posted the precise percentages in a previous post.) Moreover, the probability of ruin
factors (how much money you need to play even if you could obtain a small advantage) were
astronomical! So we dumped the idea. Our consensus was that it was impossible for even an expert
poker player to obtain a long term advantage against present day casino table fees or rakes.
That does not mean that if an expert player was playing against a
private game with no rake, no doubt the expert would **eventually** (if the game lasted long enough
for his percentage expertise to surface, or if he lived long enough - both of which are
extremely doubtful) win more money than a less experienced player. But could he win so much more
as to offset the house rake and still make a profit? The consensus is that is impossible to
do. Moreover, consider the undefinable mathematical factors related to this question:
1. Are you being cheated in the poker game? Keep in mind that
casinos hire shills to play poker.They pay them a small hourly wage to offset the rake impact, and they
get to keep their winnings. Does this sound deceitful? It should because it is very
deceitful. These shills use various team tactics to fleece the suckers. (When I owned a piece of
a casino, our casino offered a big poker room with high stakes games. I learned a lot of insider
information, and many poker dealers became personal friends.) Also remember the poker room does
not require the shills to wear badges, nor to identify themselves in any manner. The odds are
that when you walk into a poker room, you are entering a den of thieves.
2. There are so many ways to cheat in poker it is hard to count them.
I have seen luminous readers with perfect casino backs that black lights nor ultra violet
lights could detect. The poker room bosses could care less whether the shills are cheating or not.
They just want their rake.
Stacking decks, cold decking and switching decks to luminous readers goes on all the time.
3. It is strange when a high roller whale arrives at a poker game,
the shills from other poker
rooms come out of the woodwork. They must have their own chat group
or something.
4. Many poker rooms are not casino operated. They are run by
independent contractors that pay the casino a set figure. They have a heavy nut they must pay each
month. They need to make it up somehow. They usually find a way if the action is light in
any particular month.
knives drawn almost on a daily basis. People were hurt and some killed regularly over arguments that
ensued from these games. When I played in Vietnam, a group of us would duck snipers to drive
from Can Tho to the big Air Base at Bien Thuy to play the Fly Boys pot limit poker. Many a
night safeties would be heard clicking off automatic weapons over some cheating or card
holdout accusation. Poker, high limit poker, is dangerous and is known to be very hazardous to
your health.
cheat that won. It became almost impossible to find an honest game. I still doubt if any high stakes
games are honest. There are simply too many ways to cheat. The temptation is too great for many.
So what should you say to someone that makes the preposterous claim
that you can “make a living playing poker?” Ask them if that is true, then why are they
selling a book about it? If it really were true, the last thing professional poker players would
want are potential adversaries to learn their secrets. They claim they can win only because they play
against less skilled players.
play better by selling them books containing their personal poker secrets? Also, ask them if
they know of an honest high stakes game? How can you make a living if you cannot find an honest
game? And if they say there are no secrets revealed in their books, then how can they justify their claim that you can make a living playing poker if you buy their book?
Moreover, with all the cheating and deception going on in the game of
Poker, I doubt seriously if anyone would want to even attempt to make a living playing poker. You
can never know in advance the caliber of your opponents. Nor whether they are cheating
or not until it is too late. I suppose in a perfect world a possibility exists that someone could
play in a private game with no rake, against rubes, and make a living for a short time until the
money in the game ran out. But then, where can you find a “perfect world?”
Doug Grant (Tm)
Albert Wang
My response to your previous post "Luzzi Loses -Big Time":
...WOW!!!!
Such prolific writings from an obvious non-player. Are you trying to pick a
fight with all of RGP? I'm sure many of my RGP comrades will respond to you
comments. But just a few quick general points.
Yes, I do think poker AND BJ can be beaten. I'm a winner in both. In fact, I
have an easier time convincing laymen that good poker players can win than
good BJ players. It would be hard to believe that all my pro poker friends
and myself are six sigma's out. Or maybe I should ask what they really do
for a living. ;)
And remember, simulations are only as good as the logic used to program
them. Your so-called "perfect mathematical play" may even have been
programmed correctly...but my pro-poker friends and I have a name for this
type of player....."FISH".
Simple math calculations and simulations will take you a long way in BJ
counting and strategy... but it is only one of many basic skills for the pro
poker player. Some of your points make as much sense as laymen saying: "...I
can count to 21 perfectly and always lose in BJ, therefore BJ cannot be
beaten!!!" I would love to play against your poker program, but not
against your BJ program.
Games of skill favor the better player. I certainly feel that in poker I
have many multiples of the ~1% edge you have in "perfect" BJ play. This
includes the house cut.
I am sure there would be many players who would like the opportunity to play
poker against your "program" or even better, yourself. Where do I sign up?
Hope I am never drawing dead,
Albert
DGRANT wrote in message <6rkcuv$53m$1...@supernews.com>...
wdcowey
but I shall try.
> house rake or advantage
> based upon even money payoffs. It is a very simple chart as it deals
> only with even money
> payoffs and a standard house rake percentage of five percent.
That would be true if that were the way poker in a casino operated but it
isn't. The rake has an upper limit, generally in the $3 to $5 range. And
the payoff is normally not an even money payoff but is strongly leveraged.
Three and four to one payoffs are normal and I have seen 7:1
> Blackjack and Poker are never-ending
> giant games that go on for as long as you play them. Contrary to
> popular opinion (and especially
> contrary to what Ray DeGennaro A.K.A. Rubin et al aliases said about
> Poker) you cannot
> “fool” the math by simply leaving the game and then returning another
> day.
That part is true.
>Moreover, the
>following chart does not have anything to do with the other players.
But one of the poker skills is selecting a table, or game, that has less
skilled players who make mistakes, like drawing to hands when they don't
have the pot odds to do it. If I don't play bad hands and keep the pot
odds equation in my favor I acquire a huge edge over my opponents.
-
> This chart is extremely accurate (that is why I used 2x2 Sigma) and
> revealing. Now you know why casinos’ make so much money. And now
> you know why I say an expert
> poker player cannot overcome the typical house rake. I initially
> said they could not
> overcome a 10% house rake, but I thought I would show you exactly how
> bad even **half** that amount
> will be if the poker player is stupid enough to keep playing.
You missed. Try again with a 10% rake limited to $3 as a maximum amount
raked from any one pot. And use a payoff of at least 2:1
The rest of your post deals with cheating and I am not worried about it.
I'm not that paranoid.
Wayne D. Cowey
wdcowey
Stephen H. Landrum <slan...@pacbell.net>
> Please either remove rec.gambling.poker from the Newsgroups: line,
> or remove all other newsgroups from the Newsgroups: line when
> replying to any post in a thread started by Doug Grant.
> --
> "Stephen H. Landrum" <slan...@pacbell.net>
Oops. Sorry. Didn't notice the cross-posts. Anyway, that was a one-time
reply. I intend to ignore all of his future posts.
Wayne
andr...@my-dejanews.com
"DGRANT" <dgg...@lvcm.com> wrote:
Much of the nonsense deleted...
Just my .02 cents - Yes it is very important to consider the 'juice'
anyone charges in a form of a rake, vig, commision etc. Yes everyone who
is savvy knows this. Well OEX options have a pretty big percentage commission
and the spread is sometimes hefty, much worst than poker. You would hence
assume that noone makes money in the OEX (except the floor trader) and
we all know that this is bullshit ! You and I can make money in the OEX
market and we can also make money in 20-40 holdem, we can beat any decent
game that has a positive expectation !!
It is futile to consider BJ and poker similar, BJ can only be beaten by
counting and dealing (I prefer to deal), it is not a pos expectation game.
This guy (Doug Grant) has been harping on this nonsense about the poker
rake forever and he refuses to even consider the fact that there are minions
of people who make more in poker than lose (despite the rake and tokes !!).
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
dggrant
Albert Wang wrote in message ...
>DGrant,
>My response to your previous post "Luzzi Loses -Big Time":
>
>...WOW!!!!
>Such prolific writings from an obvious non-player. Are you trying to
pick a
>fight with all of RGP? I'm sure many of my RGP comrades will respond
to you
>comments. But just a few quick general points.
>
>Yes, I do think poker AND BJ can be beaten. I'm a winner in both. In
fact, I
>have an easier time convincing laymen that good poker players can win
than
>good BJ players. It would be hard to believe that all my pro poker
friends
>and myself are six sigma's out. Or maybe I should ask what they
really do
>for a living. ;)
As you should know, your particular winning experience is not
statistically significant. In fact it is meaningless. Lots of people
win playing slots, that does not mean you can make a living playing
slots. Moreover, what you **believe** is restricted to your ability
to calmly inquire into all of the applicable facts. Some people
**believe** in flying saucers, but that does not mean they exist. If
all of the poker players could be interviewed collectively, you would
find they all eventually will lose if they are playing against a
typical house rake.
Moreover, many so-called "Poker Pros" are paid an hourly wage to shill
for the house. That hourly wage will overcome the house rake. Of
course the "Poker Pros" play together and signal and work the suckers,
and some think that is illegal but unfortunately it is not. So no
doubt your "Poker Pros" friends could actually be way ahead of the
game under those conditions.
>And remember, simulations are only as good as the logic used to
program
>them. Your so-called "perfect mathematical play" may even have been
>programmed correctly...but my pro-poker friends and I have a name for
this
>type of player....."FISH".
Perhaps. But tell me, how can you dispute a program that you have
never seen? You do not have the slightest idea of what that program
contains. BTW, several so-called "Pro" poker players were consulted
by the programmer when he wrote the program. Also, please
mathematically quantify your meaning of "FISH?"
That description is arbitrary and really has zero meaning in respect
to the question of whether an expert poker player can overcome a
typical house rake. The only people I see making such claims are
Poker shills, and book authors. Obviously, such claims are made for
self serving ulterior motives. BTW, which group are you involved
with? The casino poker rooms or the book authors?
>Simple math calculations and simulations will take you a long way in
BJ
>counting and strategy... but it is only one of many basic skills for
the pro
>poker player. Some of your points make as much sense as laymen
saying: "...I
>can count to 21 perfectly and always lose in BJ, therefore BJ cannot
be
>beaten!!!" I would love to play against your poker program, but not
>against your BJ program.
Your above statement is nonsensical. My points are well made and
mathematically correct. Either you cannot understand them, or you
choose not to understand them. But they are correct in every detail.
Your "opinion" of the value of the skills of a pro poker player goes
beyond mathematical probability almost to the verge of impossible. Do
you really know what it means to obtain an advantage over opponents in
excess of 10%? I believe it is impossible considering the nature of
the game of poker even if an expert player was playing against
Chimpanzees! Our best calculations would give an expert player
playing against a neophyte about a 3.5 to 4.0 percent advantage if the
neophyte was a retard and never learned a thing. But if the neophyte
player learned as he played, then the aforestated advantage would
dwindle down to break even. Obviously, if a house is raking 5% or
more, the expert poker player cannot win. Not to mention that expert
poker players are caught in the trap of playing against OTHER expert
poker players most of the time!
>Games of skill favor the better player. I certainly feel that in
poker I
>have many multiples of the ~1% edge you have in "perfect" BJ play.
This
>includes the house cut.
Please provide me with a mathematical value for your term "feel."
"Feel" cannot be evaluated nor quantified. You must convert "Feel"
into a percentage value. The question is whether an expert poker
player can overcome a typical house rake. I say it is impossible.
But if you guys would ever start talking turkey, and stop the "Feels"
and the "Believes" and the other bullshit, then perhaps I will change
my mind.
>I am sure there would be many players who would like the opportunity
to play
>poker against your "program" or even better, yourself. Where do I
sign up?
>
I only wager when I have the advantage. If I play you privately and
you are an expert poker player, then I will not have an advantage even
if the house does not rake anything. However, how much better do you
think you are than me? Do you think you could spot me 5% (same as
many house rakes) and still beat me? I certainly would love to have
that deal. And we could prove once and for all whether an expert
player could overcome a house rake and make money to boot.
Doug Grant (Tm)
Maverick
< endless blatherings of Duggie snipped>
> Doug Grant (Tm)
Doug,
Get a life...or take a statistics class for once.
Robert Fagen
: [ in speaking to Albert Wang about 'professional' poker players being ]
: [ unable to sustain an advantage against less skilled players and to also ]
: [ overcome the house rake, Doug said: ]
:
: I only wager when I have the advantage. If I play you privately and
: you are an expert poker player, then I will not have an advantage even
: if the house does not rake anything. However, how much better do you
: think you are than me? Do you think you could spot me 5% (same as
: many house rakes) and still beat me? I certainly would love to have
: that deal. And we could prove once and for all whether an expert
: player could overcome a house rake and make money to boot.
: Doug Grant (Tm)
Oh, me me me me me, please me first!
Tell you what, Doug. Next time I'm in Vegas (I'm assuming that's where
you live, since that's where I recall the bankruptcy papers being filed
from. I might be incorrect), let's sit down and play a little 40-80 limit
holdem. We'll both buy in for $4000. We'll use the standard Mirage rake.
However, instead of the rake going down a hole, you get to add the rake
back to your stack every hand as a little refund on your action.
I'm certain that if you chose to meet this challenge from me, there would be
an almost infinite supply of fellow r.g.p regulars that would line up behind
me to take you on, as well.
C'mon Doug! This is perfect! *You* get to be the house. Not only would your
superior tactical and analytical skills crush me in a normal game of
poker, but you also have the _insurmountable_ advantage of the house rake
sloshing dollar after dollar into your stack! 5% of all the action (up to
$2.50 or $3 per hand, whatever the Mirage 40-80 rake as of 9/4/98 is)
heading towards your towering stack of chips. $4000, Doug! Ripe and ready
for the taking.
If you don't come after this 5% advantage (limited to $2.50 per hand) then I
can't imagine what kind of advantage player you are. You might even get some
of the system selling hucksters like Mason Malmuth, David Sklansky or Mike
Caro to line up as well. These pretty boys have taken enough of the public's
money spewing mindless nonsense out via their publications. I think it's about
time that they put up or shut up.
You know what, Doug? If you took this deal, Abdul might even come out of the
woodwork to pay penance for the unholy disinformation he's been spreading
over there in Con Man City(tm).
C'mon Doug! Champion us mathematically impaired dupes of the establishment
pigs!
Remember though, *I* get to give you my $4000 first, becuase I thought of it.
Hugs & Kisses,
Rob 'heh. I'd go for $5k, but then I'd have to avoid a CTR[1]' Fagen
[1]...and I'd never do that. No, really. Never would. Haven't ever. Pay
attention you IRS people. Never, ever, ever, ever structured in my life.
Really. No irony here whatsoever! I mean it. Hey... what was that crashing
sound? Who are you? How did you get in my house? HEL.#$*(!)*~~(~~~NO CARRIER
--
Rob Fagen 650-432-8101 | This .signature is currently out of order.
fa...@bigfoot.com | The management sincerely regrets any inconvenience
I represent only myself | caused by this outage. Please use the stairs instead.
Abdul Jalib
any other newsgroup. You will only spread the disease that infects
that newsgroup.
imgi...@netcom.com (Robert Fagen) writes:
> C'mon Doug! This is perfect! *You* get to be the house. Not only would your
> superior tactical and analytical skills crush me in a normal game of
> poker, but you also have the _insurmountable_ advantage of the house rake
> sloshing dollar after dollar into your stack! 5% of all the action (up to
> $2.50 or $3 per hand, whatever the Mirage 40-80 rake as of 9/4/98 is)
> heading towards your towering stack of chips. $4000, Doug! Ripe and ready
> for the taking.
Yes, I had thought of that too.
The Mirage 40-80 "rake" is $5 per half hour (I think you might not
have to pay for the first half hour if the game is two handed.)
I'm afraid Doug would be the winner of this contest, because he would
simply refuse to play a hand, and would win $10 per hour from you with
no risk. I suggest you play 20-40 instead - it's about 2% rake (money
is taken at weird increments, but it averages to about 2%) with a $3
max currently. Heads up, the rake is reduced to $1 on the first $100,
or sometimes $1 on the first $200, or sometimes zero.
--
Abdul Jalib wearing the hat of |
Professional Degenerate Gambler|
AbdulJ_...@PosEV.com | (Delete _DELETE_ to reply via email.)